Great video pointing out one of the many areas where DCS needs to improve.....there are many others. I will pick with you one point. You can simulate a game, you can game a simulation, but there is a huge difference between a game and a simulation. DCS, and most of the current computer based attempts are recreating the atmosphere of military flying are SIMULATIONS. Some are much better than others, some have more unrealistic elements...for example. labels and spotting aids which doesn't happen in real life and I would say are "GAME" elements. If you're not aware of what a simulation is and why it's different than a game then maybe you shouldn't simply call DCS or any other flight program a game. In simplest terms, checkers is a game, it doesn't represent real life, there is a singular goal, finite strategies and is (relatively) easily reproduced on a computer....like tic tac toe. A simulation is an attempt to recreate an experience or system that we see in real life, be that an ecological simulation of a african velt, or a simulation of the dynamics of a lake...or a flight simulation.... military or non military....doesn't matter. The point is that you are trying to capture that real life experience. I have never seen a perfect simulation....and that isn't always the goal. It's easy to find faults and be critical of a simulation and indeed that is a necessary part of the process but the real question is: Does the simulation capture the essence of the system being simulated? To what degree? How can it be improved. etc. Having real life experience in fast military aircraft, I can tell you that none of what I have flown on computers is like the real thing....some come closer than others in capturing the experience, but close is not the same as the real thing. DCS comes close but in many areas there is a wide gulf, but for most of you who will never sit in or fly a military jet, it lets you experience, a taste if you like, of the complexity involved. Keep up the good work finding the areas that are lacking with the hope that the poobahs at DCS are taking notes and will address at least some of the issues in the future. We have to admit...at least DCS is better than most in updating their sim.
They've been on a decent, steady track to improving their sim as you said. I just wish things were much better managed over there. Every update I check the patch notes and have to shake my head and wonder what the heck they are even doing most of the time. Thank you for this comment btw. I enjoyed reading it :D
@@18skaterboy18 If you're referring to me, I made it clear that I was in real life military aviation in the late 60's flying tactical strike fighters in the century series. While I'm in my 70's and can't fly anymore, I can assure you that I haven't forgotten everything, but it's fine by me if you want to be sarcastic. I was hopefully trying to be helpful with a bit of wisdom. Out.
How is War Thunder not meant to be a simulator? It's what used to be called a survey sim, and it's actually very good at that. It does a very good job at representing the evolving tactics of small scale air combat from the 1930s through the 1990s, which no other simulator can claim to do. The huge problem with War Thunder is that it has all that free-to-play crap piled on top of it. Gaijin is also very transparent about how countermeasures, missile seekers, and radars are implemented in their game. These are simplified compared to real life but most of these are actually much more advanced than DCS.
I realized this with IR missles a long time ago, flying the A-10. Just flare same time same conditions wildly different results. Learned to just keep flaring until i found the missile and saw it go off corse or the mws stopped beeping. I didn’t think it would apply to radar countermeasures as well though…
The thing is, VTOL VR has better radar than dcs, the game itself has the goofiest graphics possible, but has fully modeled dynamic radar cross section, fully modeled electronic waves spectrum (not joking)
@@dougmasters4561 The chaff is already in the game, the modeling of it's affects is already modeled on some radars such as those by Razbam and Heatblur. ED has failed to do it themselves. Flare modeling wouldn't be hard. War Thunder has realistic flare modeling and that game is just Ace Combat at this point
lets all remember this is a modern "simulator" that has AI that is almost as good as falcon 3.0's. Now give ED 56 dollars for a half finished single block of the F-16.
It is honestly terrible, on how they just let it fly into the terrain like it wasn't even there. I get AI is not the easiest thing to do, but this is also an air combat game.
@@Raiders1917 I presume you know that AI aircraft can be set to be Rookie, Trained, Veteran or Ace in the Mission Editor. So maybe it was a Rookie AI flying into terrain like it wasn't even there:) On the other hand I and many others have flown into terrain when chasing a bandit at low level in MP fights and getting distracted at the wrong moment. Just like some real WW2 pilots too...
I play war thunder. A lot, in fact. RB and sim modes. I don’t play DCS, outside a session or two of learning the basics with a friend. Despite that, I’m always disappointed when I look into how things are going with the game and see that the devs are ignoring or propagating issues. I liked the idea that there was this expensive and difficult to learn but extremely good sim game with a supportive dev team in my favorite niche genre. Sad to see the dev problem extends to y’all’s community too. Stay strong.
@@Whiskey11Gaming I remember when they first added a range gate to the AIM-120, it made notching even better because the range gate was either so small/improperly modeled that it failed to reacquire the target if it was notched and the target exited the notch
They will probably write a white paper about it first as if it some miracular technology and not something that almost occurs naturally in the engineering process if you take the doppler-shift out of the pulse-doppler transceiver.
@PrezDCS DCS is honestly set up as more of a sandbox or a pit sim more than anything else. This isn't Falcon 4.0 (a sim that came out in the 90s) where it models an actual war.
@@PrezDCS a simulation is a simlipified approximation of something, and the level of simplification is determined by the desired accuracy, what your hardware can realistically support and the amount of time you want to spend developing it. since most of DCS has its roots in software thats 25 years old, this shallow level is to be expected. this is no reason to leave it like that, but its clearly visible that ED are slowly but steadily improving on it. we, as a community, should focus on pushing the need for this rework a bit harder, a discussion on their discord usually gets at some acknowledgement. (keeping to the rules that is)
@@broko336lmao no a simulation is not A simulation is the re-creation of a real world process in a controlled environment. It involves creating laws and models to represent the world, and then running those models to see what happens. A Simulation can only be accurate as you wish it to be.
I really don’t like that DCS doesn’t have proper Radar cross section simulations. I’m paying up to $60 for a plane that has the exact same Radar cross section from any angle you look at it with. VTOL VR does this far better meaning that Angle of attack actually changes how likely you are to be detected. Ex. You are less likely to be detected from head on than from the side.
I’m very glad you’ve made this video, it’s an element we’ve been trying to address for a long time. As egregious as the barrel roll, they’re essentially the same thing. Use of yaw mostly and/or minor, frequent pitch changes below the missile is seen done by almost all of the ‘top’ teams out there and it’s gross. If you’re not using your rudder pedals, your survival chances decrease significantly. But it’s meta for now and the fight must go on.
the rudder is not the key to notching. anyone who’s good at it can notch without the rudder, not using the rudder does not make it harder at all or decrease your ability to notch. anyone who can do it already should have 0 issue without ruddering
I posted an image from the textbook the radar dev was reading and got banned by them clearly because they got tired of me its a real thing. They claimed I broke ITAR rules rofl.
Found your vid yesterday and just tried the notch thing 10 times in the hornet and it worked every time, didnt get hit a single time. Never thought in my 11 years of playing DCS that it was like this… it does make it feel alot more like a game. The more you scratch on the dcs surface, the more it takes away the fun
Lmao absolutely. Luckily DCS doesn't have too much issue with lag at least below 250 ping, but there are certainly still millions of issues with the netcode.
Go to growling server, bunch of f looswes with 300+ ping calling others skill issue when they lag every single second when nothing or literally starts teleporting when missile is fired at them, im also more then sure 80% of those guys are using lag switch in dcs that is present in dcs since last few years... Sad af.
Perfect breakdown of the DCS notch. I too hope that it becomes more dynamic. Though it is important to note that your chaff breakdown only applies to multiplayer. In singleplayer, the chaff entity is spawned with properties like radar reflectivity. This allows you to evade missiles by just going cold and then dumping chaff with a turn. Not to LARP, I agree its a game, but apparently this is the most common usage of chaff/jaff IRL I found it astonishing that in the DCS Flaming Cliffs manual, this is described as THE way to evade fox 3s, but does not work at all in multiplayer. Maybe left in the manual from a DCS predecessor who knows.
These same issues have been around since the beginning. Does anyone remember Ironhand’s old tutorial showing how you could use the Russia Beryoza to precisely time an orthogonal roll around an AIM-120? That was from the Lock On days. Pre-Flaming Cliffs.
@@nighthawk2174 more than ED lets on. Would t surprise me if there’s a sizable amount of code from Flanker 2.0 or earlier. Don’t get me wrong, DCS is very flawed but it’s a sound product. There’s a lot of capability there for those who want to use it. But the fundamental mechanics are still not the best. If the AI in DCS worked better with large operations, small details like notching wouldn’t be as bad. Perfect notching isn’t going to save you in a large scale air war where you’re getting attacked by multiple aggressors mixed in with long, medium, and short rage air defense.
I love when people in the dcs community get mad when you call it a video game. It’s 100 percent a video game lmao. Made for us losers who don’t have the balls to serve in real life. That’s like calling a Sunday larp a real battle.
I think Mike Solyom's videos are excellent at explaining how things would work in real life, and he just happens to use DCS as his visual aid. I'd expect his videos to be much more applicable to Falcon BMS.
Here's how we combine both views in 335th: For Defensive Counter-Air we run low/medium risk timelines and kinematically defeat missiles. For Offensive Counter-Air we run high-risk timelines, with high-pk shots. Once we are banzai in the visual arena where you can't defeat the missile kinematically we notch, so we have less ATA and keep the hostile defensive until he runs into the ground or eats a missile. We used to have a fantastic rwr in the F-15E and it's still good but not as easy to notch as with the F-15Cs. DCAF will be recruiting soon, so if you want to experience our top of the line training and ops seasons, check out our Forum posts and get in contact!
I'm just a casual follower of DCS, never really played it, I just like to see what's going on with it occasionally. This was very entertaining and informative. Also, you sound suspiciously like S2 Underground lol.
Hiya - Thanks for putting this out there. - Has challenged me to up my knowledge and insights on this. So would be great if you could link to say 5 or 10 tacview example files, specifically using the F16 as the defender, and where you notched and defeated Fox3 missiles in the various scenarios as described in the video. Especially a couple where the missile has already gone Pitbull/ active. Will be great for personal learning from the analysis thereof --- and then to attempt to repeat and validate your assessment myself. I noticed for instance that the video at 1:07 shows the threat symbol on the F16 RWR jumping to a new position and not moving smoothly which implies it isn't perfectly accurate and is behaving more realistically than implied in the video? Also what about the situation where a bandit is firing multiple missiles at you from different directions more than 5-10degrees apart specifically to hit you with one of those as you are busy notching the first one? Thanks
I said the symbols transition smoothly for the F-15 not the F-16, just that the F-16 wasn't as inaccurate as you are led to believe. Also, no I have no way of sharing tacviews in the way you wish. Just got and practice it on your own. I have shown you everything you need to do in the video.
@@PrezDCS Ok thanks - I might be missing it but does the video show how to KNOW where the 90degree offset is for a missile behind you? I get it that you can refer to RWR or HMCS and assess 90degrees for the notch of the bandits aircraft radar (assuming they are using a radar mode that can be picked up by the RWR), and you can hear the warning tone disappear once lock broken...but am not sure how you assess the missile's direction in order to notch its radar once it is pitbull?
@@mikekohler2279 There's no way to know where the missile is in space until it goes active. All you can do is notch the launching aircraft's radar and hope the missile fails to acquire
Some questions: 1. Why does HPRF require a wider notch filter? 2. How should the countermeasures work instead? Should they either always work or never work depending on the radar/missile used?
@@delayed_control 1. HPRF has larger notch filters b/c it has more range ambiguity than lower PRFs b/c it acquires all its info through Doppler shift(phase comparison) and therefore needs sizeable shifts in phase b/c if the phase shift required for detection is very small you end up with lots of false alarm detections from random ground clutter 2. Some radars in game already simulate realistic chaff effects like the Razbam radars where depending the parameters of the radar, the chaff blooms will create new detections that mess with the radar. This is something that should be standard. As for flares, they could most likely model IR seekers pretty accurately without too much effort and then flare rejection would just be based on sensitivity to new heat sources/FOV which then could further be used for IRCCM modeling like in the 9M where if the seeker detects a new bright hot spot(flare) it shutters like IRL to ignore the new heat source and reacquire the normal one. These would add vastly more accurate ways to employ countermeasures
"Why does HPRF require a wider notch filter?" - Not all. It depends of radar. "How should the countermeasures work instead? Should they either always work or never work depending on the radar/missile used?" - Everything depends on scripts and MTI clutter fillter. It just probability.
@@PrezDCS "1. HPRF has larger notch filters b/c it has more range ambiguity than lower PRFs b/c it acquires all its info through Doppler shift(phase comparison) and therefore needs sizeable shifts in phase b/c if the phase shift required for detection is very small you end up with lots of false alarm detections from random ground clutter" - it depends on radar, because every radar can have another bandwith and higher or lower transmit power.
DCS has always been about appearances sadly. Occasionally they replace some underlying component, but there are so many pieces to replace that the number of crappy components can still ruin the few masterful pieces.
As someone just now starting DCS and dumping 50-something dollars into the F16, this is extremely disheartening. I always believed that DCS was one of the most (if not the most) realistic modern flight simulators on the market. It definitely seemed like it too with how much the modules cost. Thank you for this video. It definitely has me reconsidering some things in DCS, at least until these issues are properly addressed.
It's the best simulator for learning how to operate the aircraft. So, if you really just like pushing buttons and feeling like you're in the cockpit of a real F-16 then this is the game for you. But if you're looking for a realistic combat experience then this isn't the place
With the advent of hardware level raytracing, actual direct real time optical simulation modeling of radar has become a reality a few years ago. Why it hasnt become common practice yet is beyond me.
I know that ray tracing tech just wasn't possible in DCS until maybe 2 years ago. It was one of Heatblur's big complaints that they couldn't model the AWG-9 correctly b/c of the lack of ray tracing. After it was added, Razbam was promoting the use of ray tracing in their SAR modeling for the F-15E. So, it's very much possible, but it would certainly tank the performance of some people's systems as much as I would prefer it to be commonplace.
@@PrezDCS While I understand the concern, it could be mad eoptional, and would at any rate be significantly less performance intensive than graphical raytracing. You dont need to update it at 60Hz, you can get away with just a few rays per radar, rather than one per display pixel, and you can completely skip mapping the trace into display data.
Thank you for this mate. This won’t be what you want to hear but I was thinking about getting DCS, I think I’ll just watch YT videos and fly other games.
You could free trial modules on standalone version, in a chain, and never really pay for anything. There are free mods as well, such as the A4E which can be used on servers.
I was actually going to make one a while ago, but it fell by the wayside. I might do so here soon tho since people seem to enjoy these kinds of videos.
Jesus christ I thought the guy who was going on about War Thunder's missile modelling being better was just having a laugh? DCS uses rng for countermeasures!? Very informative video, thanks for making it.
I remember one time on a blueflag server years ago, I was in an F16 and fired an amraam at a hornet, he instantly goes into the notch. Little did he know, I was close enough that he was also within sidewinder range so I followed up with an aim9x. The 9x hit him, but he assumed the amraam did and began raging in chat demanding to know how he could have possibly gotten hit by an aim120, and I must have used some underhanded tactic (I think he may have accused me of cheating but I forget it's been so long), before he realized he died to a sidewinder. This was a well known skilled player who will remain unnamed. That's how much people rely on notching to be 100% consistent.
I like the mention about the questionable guidance logic. It is comically easy to outmaneuver certain missiles (namely the 120c) by simply running perpendicular to the missile, pulling max G vertical for about a second or 2, inverting, and repeating the same until the missile passes by. Hilarious to watch it fail to keep up on tacview.
i myself play War Thunder but i like and appreciate DCS has, and notching is really rather effective and simple method of defeating a PD radar but multipathing is also rather important as (at least in War Thunder ) you don't necessarily need to go cold to defeat a radar aam , nicely done breaking it down thx
A great presentation man & very well explained, but what about all the DCS Pilots out there ( incl. me ) that have never used nor even heard of Notching before?
Well, if you want to know more about the notch then watch Mike Solyom's video :) This video isn't intended to be a "Baby's first notch" kind of thing. I made it with the assumption that you would already have an understanding of what the notch is even if you didn't know how to do it properly.
Notching is when a radar targeted plane flies in a certain angle and altitude in relation to the radar beam. That way they can create a notch or a "blind spot" in order to lose the lock or disapper from radar completely.
@@VilleVaananen there’s a lot more detail to it than that. Some radars can’t be notched, and even the ones that can have the ability to ignore it in some situations like what I describe in the video
Beautiful video. Highlighting the fact that this game mechanic is incredibly easy to pull off which basically removes the skill required to kinematically defeat a missile, then locate, and re-engage the enemy faster. Its a shame to see how one small issue is making such a big change in the games gameplay which could probably be fixed quite simply. Would love if you would call out some of the other issues with dcs as well that doesn't really get highlighted or may be unknown to other players: -vr spotting being incredible -how the tpod over preforms on may modules -how broken jammers are code wise -and how bad ground AI such as sams truly are. A video such as this highlights these issues well and is better than an explanation from someones mouth.
I was in the process of making a video covering jamming a few months ago, but it fell by the wayside. I might do it now tho. Also, I don't have VR to do the spotting one, or enough references for the tpod performance. I know about ground AI tho especially for SAMs. I've actually been writing my own code for guidance logic of the older soviet SAM systems on my free time with the hopes of modding DCS with it.
@@PrezDCS yeah I think we just need a little more exposure to the issues on dcs and the jammer would be another one. And I would love to explain the issues with the tpod but they are not as much of a problem compared to the things that affect pvp.
If you're just hovering or actually in the notch yeah, but ED have admitted that they added some extra values to make helicopters more survivable in multiplayer lol
Actually if you spin (roll with a little pitch) towards missiles in DCS they will miss 4/5 of the time. It's hilariously stupid because proximity fuses don't work in multiplayer.
Yeah, but that's a netcode issue usually, not really supposed to happen. Just a symptom of the complexity of net syncing in the game. That's actually just exploiting the game lol
@@PrezDCS it only affects the client planes, the host plane is actually at a major disadvantage as the spin trick won't work. Also, I wouldn't call it just a netcode issue. I'm compiling footage of the phenomenon and the way missiles work plus how planes in DCS "look" in the world (only the pilot models aspect matters this is why ground units always headshot) combine for a deadly stupid combo. In BMS this just doesn't happen
@@andrewa837 Oh I know it only matters about where the pilot is. That's how the fusing works. Fusing is technically modeled in multiplayer but because it's based off the pilot it never actually accurately fuses lol
@@PrezDCS this is not correct the Fuze explodes from the Plane model if you test it in detail you will also notice this The ground units aiming at the head is also no longer the case.(for well over a year) test this in detail and you will find exactly that, place your aircraft on a Field next to a unit of your choice, it will shoot at the centre of the aircraft and so on.
I see a lot of complaints about chaff and flare being RNG but I’ve never seen anybody offer a better solution. There is no absolute guarantee that chaff and flare works in every IRL situation, so isn’t the employment/deployment of C&F IRL essentially slightly RNG? So what needs to be changed? Better tolerances in the programming? Better odds in the slot machine? lol. Genuinely curious
If you've flown Razbam's F-15E and Mirage 2000, or Heatblur's F-4 and F-14, they have actually modeled the effects of chaff on radars extremely well in that they actually cause false alarm detections on the radar within certain parameters and radar settings. This is not the case for ED modules and certainly not the missiles. As for IR, one just needs to look at War Thunder (haha yes le funny inaccurate game). They have an infinitely better IR model than DCS does and DCS has existed for FAR longer and is supposed to be actually be a simulator.
So all i have to do is look at my RWR and dive 90° away from the missile source and I won´t get hit? Why didn´t I hear this earlier, or am I wrong? How to defend IR Missiles like Sidewinders effectivly?
Yeah pretty much. You still need a little finesse to do it well, and you have to hit the parameters as I've stated in this video. And to defend IR missiles I stated in the video that all you need to do is spam flares cuz it's just a dice roll everytime you pop one
Please post some GS hops in your Charlie Eagle. I fly the Viper exclusively, and am genuinely interested in the pvp experience with that aircraft. Frankly, it's hard to wrap my head around not having L16. Thanks in advance and thanks for this vid too! 🤝🏾
Will do. I fly it every now and then on GS, but without link16 it's really hard to make decisions relying on the slow update rate of the AWACS giving you piecemeal information
How is it a game? It simulates the actual flight ,model and systems of the aircraft. Does it need work on things like notching absolutely but that doesnt make it a game
@montrose699 you can call it whatever you want. Since you can play it at home on an ordinary PC with a mouse and keyboard, it only simulates a few aspects not all aspects. Goat Simulator is named as a simulator but no one actually knows what a goat goes through on a daily basis.
@@heremyjogan so the fact that some militaries use it to train aircraft startup and shutdown procedures as well as system and weapons setup and deployment doesn't matter???? I don't see one startup video or weapon use video or any real instructional video for War Thunder. If you know of any please share I am honestly interested
Although it provides fire res and better absorption, it really doesn't make that big of a different compared to a regular gapple. Notch is just not that op imo
As long Chizh seat in his place at ED, there are no chanches to see qby improvement, SATAL players should mock him during streams and meme notch or AoA everything to show how a disgrace is missile notching in dcs, same for flaring everything that is launched from the frontal emisphere
I understand that perpendicular flight in ground background defeats doppler shift gating target discriminators, but if its so effective, why hasnt distance gating as a secondary discriminator not become more widespread earlier? As early as the sixties ranging was commonly calculated from phase interfefence of the reflected wave in pulsed wave radars, so it should only require signal processing electronics, no new antenna by the time radar guided missiles became common in air combat.
I dont want to be that guy, but I have to.... MSFS is a game. DCS...as a war fighting simulator...is also a game. DCS as a training aid for ground handling and flight characteristics is second to none and therefore should qualify as a decent flight simulator alone. When Boeing tells you that you need to undo a specific build of the Hornet because it was "too close" to actual flight dynamics, you're a legit flight simulator. The thing that kills me is when ED selectively adds unrealistic things to their aircraft, but wont listen to customers when it comes to adding weapons to aircraft. For example: the F-18 Blk 20 never carried AIM9X, but here we are...yet we ask for the APKWS, its been flown on that block before, and its a plug and play missile, but nope...not doing that.
Yes, DCS is a great "cockpit" simulator. It does flight dynamics really well. But the combat portion of the title leaves a lot to be desired. That's kind of the big issue here.
It's a bit funny that a game like VTOL VR can model dynamic RCS based on angle and RWR as non-perfect, but THE modern combat flight sim currently in the market doesn't
@4:39 you have presented a list which proves more problems than good aspects of the MPRF, so it's not as you say, "impossible" to notch and actually I suppose that the tiny little radar the AIM-120 has compared to that of a fighter, will actually be easier to notch at low altitudes where both the doppler is dead because the target has the same closure rate as the ground and the pulse, because there is enough clutter to saturate the signal and still give it a good chance to have the missile loose lock on the real target, especially when chaff is also dropped. So no..., from that perspective, I totally disagree that MPRF is some sort of alien tech which defies the laws of physics and any radar's limitations which are still there. MPRF may give less lock losses, but those are still there due to the told reasons. "EXTREMELY EASY TO DEFEAT"! Noooo..! Heheh, not that easy as you like to exaggerate it! Just try doing another video showing all of us how you "defeat" the AIM-120 so "extremely easily" 10 repeated times by having a single AIM-120 fired at you in every try and notch it in the same manner, so then we would believe you for it! I don't think anyone out there has ever put more hours in testing exactly this issue more than I had and I wish to meet that one who did so! Exactly what you say is only applying to R-27s. Those are extremely easy to notch. I agree with you only there! Tested! About the RWR, the FC3's F-15C is a joke of arcade behaving flight controls and indestructible structure at any G-load, made mostly for kid pilots to win with, despite overperforming at turn rates at high AoAs as well, it also has that 100% accurate RWR. I would actually vote to either correct the FC3 F-15C or be banned on serious servers, cause it's very arcadish all in all simulation should not belong to DCS!
4:40 This sentences are not 100% true statements. Probability of occurrence notching affect have wavefaze and MTI clutter fillter. Every radar have another withband, power and software of radar. The changeable PRF can help with decluttering of notching targets, but PRF not always have affact on notch.
That's my hope as well. I think everyone in the community, regardless of their leaning towards PvP multiplayer, should understand this and open their eyes to how this game really works.
I’d have to go digging on the forums for the physical evidence, but AFAIK ED has never mentioned that the missile has an MPRF mode. They don’t know how to properly model MPRF regardless. This was evidenced by a long discussion over the F-16’s radar a few years ago involving the SME Klarsnow
Okay, if you read the thread on the forums "AIM-120 still can not chase simple Split S manuever." You will see where I get what I am talking about. This is an infamous thread where Maestro, the ED missile modeler, argues with Klarsnow (an IRL Growler EWO) about how MPRF works. ED has modeled the seeker to be "MPRF" in that it has a medium PRF (10Khz) but the actual functionality of the missile is operating as HPRF. It's only MPRF in name.
The AMRAAM is actually modelled as being MPRF only, with HPRF active (Husky) not being modelled. The issue is: MPRF doesn't behave like MPRF should. The F-15E's radar (if you can get it to work these days, shoutouts to Budgie), is probably the only radar in DCS that really makes MPRF work properly, being incredibly difficult to notch thanks to range binning. Is it possible to notch still? Yes, but it's so difficult and so barely situationally possible that you're still probably dead if you were to try to notch it. Or you would be if the missiles you were shooting weren't victim to the same issue. This is why Sparrow F-15E is so strong. You aren't relying on some AMRAAM seeker to work. All you need to do is maintain lock with an accurately simulated MPRF-capable radar. Bish bash bosh. On the AMRAAM, HPRF active would be switched to first for high closure rate targets. It'd then transition to MPRF active for the remainder of the flight. The missile can go straight to MPRF active if the closure rate isn't high enough to warrant using HPRF. In DCS, only MPRF active works, but you're right that it might as well be HPRF due to how notch prone it is.
@@CaptPickguard it’s not MPRF. It’s HPRF but they call it MPRF because, as you said, they do not model it correctly at all. ED, AFAIK, has never stated it to be the case that their missile is modeled with MPRF. Also, the F-15E/Sparrow combo is the worst in the game. The F-15E barely works with sparrows as the flood mode is not available leading to failures to track against maneuvering target AND the AIM-7 CANNOT be guided in MPRF. ONLY HPRF.
@@PrezDCS My key point is that it's modelled as if it were MPRF but it behaves like HPRF. The symbology for HPRF active (Husky) is entirely absent. They need to work on how the AMRAAM switches between these modes and how these modes behave (and well, make sure both exist in the game in the first place).
@@CaptPickguard Yes, okay I agree with you there. They have modeled the AIM-120 as "MPRF" but it's functionally HPRF. That's closer to the reality. You're still wrong about the F-15E tho
@@PrezDCS Yep my note about the Sparrows comes from hazy memory of their specifics in the F-15E. The real issue is no matter how great your plane's radar is simulated, your missile is going to go active and use ED's current shoddy implementation. If MPRF on the AMRAAM behaved in the same manner as MPRF does on the Strike Eagle, it'd be lethal.
@@CaptPickguard Yeah, I agree, and that's my point when I say in the video it should have MPRF cuz it would be incredibly hard to defeat like MPRF on the APG-70
As a DCS player i have no idea why anyone else would get offended. Never have I ever considered it anything but a video game and I have yet to find someone else who was confusing themselves.
You should interact with the community more then. There's lots of people that take this game way more seriously than they should and will point out this game as analogic for IRL.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Great video pointing out one of the many areas where DCS needs to improve.....there are many others. I will pick with you one point. You can simulate a game, you can game a simulation, but there is a huge difference between a game and a simulation. DCS, and most of the current computer based attempts are recreating the atmosphere of military flying are SIMULATIONS. Some are much better than others, some have more unrealistic elements...for example. labels and spotting aids which doesn't happen in real life and I would say are "GAME" elements. If you're not aware of what a simulation is and why it's different than a game then maybe you shouldn't simply call DCS or any other flight program a game. In simplest terms, checkers is a game, it doesn't represent real life, there is a singular goal, finite strategies and is (relatively) easily reproduced on a computer....like tic tac toe. A simulation is an attempt to recreate an experience or system that we see in real life, be that an ecological simulation of a african velt, or a simulation of the dynamics of a lake...or a flight simulation.... military or non military....doesn't matter. The point is that you are trying to capture that real life experience. I have never seen a perfect simulation....and that isn't always the goal. It's easy to find faults and be critical of a simulation and indeed that is a necessary part of the process but the real question is: Does the simulation capture the essence of the system being simulated? To what degree? How can it be improved. etc. Having real life experience in fast military aircraft, I can tell you that none of what I have flown on computers is like the real thing....some come closer than others in capturing the experience, but close is not the same as the real thing. DCS comes close but in many areas there is a wide gulf, but for most of you who will never sit in or fly a military jet, it lets you experience, a taste if you like, of the complexity involved. Keep up the good work finding the areas that are lacking with the hope that the poobahs at DCS are taking notes and will address at least some of the issues in the future. We have to admit...at least DCS is better than most in updating their sim.
They've been on a decent, steady track to improving their sim as you said. I just wish things were much better managed over there. Every update I check the patch notes and have to shake my head and wonder what the heck they are even doing most of the time. Thank you for this comment btw. I enjoyed reading it :D
could you use paragraphs
This guy thinks he can fly a military aircraft in real life because he can fly it in DCS.
@@18skaterboy18 That's just true tho. I'm a qualified F-16, F-15C, F-15E, F-14, and F-4 pilot IRL because of my DCS credentials
@@18skaterboy18 If you're referring to me, I made it clear that I was in real life military aviation in the late 60's flying tactical strike fighters in the century series. While I'm in my 70's and can't fly anymore, I can assure you that I haven't forgotten everything, but it's fine by me if you want to be sarcastic. I was hopefully trying to be helpful with a bit of wisdom. Out.
it's hard to believe that dcs has less realistic radar mechanics than war thunder which is not meant to be a simulator but here we are
It really is sad to see
How is War Thunder not meant to be a simulator? It's what used to be called a survey sim, and it's actually very good at that. It does a very good job at representing the evolving tactics of small scale air combat from the 1930s through the 1990s, which no other simulator can claim to do. The huge problem with War Thunder is that it has all that free-to-play crap piled on top of it.
Gaijin is also very transparent about how countermeasures, missile seekers, and radars are implemented in their game. These are simplified compared to real life but most of these are actually much more advanced than DCS.
@wmouse it’s just that, Gaijin doesn’t broadcast itself as a study level sim. DCS does, and charges 80 dollars for it. It’s just sad.
Its a very complex and very resource intensive task to successfully implement with precision in their game.
@@nobstompah4850 Bingo. It's marketing
Notching in DCS with certain aircraft is such a skill substitute.
It takes away actual air combat tactics and promotes gaming mentality.
It's the unfortunate reality that ED has presented us with
@thebrain7441 I think I know exactly who you're talking about lol
@thebrain7441saabmissive and notchable
ED will just keep notching us when we complain. Thank you for your passion and support.
RNG countermeasures is absolutely the most diabolical thing lmao
Now I understand why in 800 hours my CMS were absolutely useless: as everything involving RNG irl, I never won In my whole life
I realized this with IR missles a long time ago, flying the A-10. Just flare same time same conditions wildly different results. Learned to just keep flaring until i found the missile and saw it go off corse or the mws stopped beeping.
I didn’t think it would apply to radar countermeasures as well though…
The thing is, VTOL VR has better radar than dcs, the game itself has the goofiest graphics possible, but has fully modeled dynamic radar cross section, fully modeled electronic waves spectrum (not joking)
The chaff and flares being a random number probability is ludicrous!
It's very gamey yeah
@PrezDCS im not sure what can truly be done about that though.
Realistic chaffe and flair sounds very complicated.
@@dougmasters4561 The chaff is already in the game, the modeling of it's affects is already modeled on some radars such as those by Razbam and Heatblur. ED has failed to do it themselves. Flare modeling wouldn't be hard. War Thunder has realistic flare modeling and that game is just Ace Combat at this point
The second he said "DCS is a video game" I liked the video
we need to put pressure on ED to improve RWR, notch, PRF and lookup simulation fidelity in their modules
and enforce these standards on 3rd party devs
@@SDsc0rch 3rd party standards outpace ED’s most of the time unfortunately
You guys have radars?
lets all remember this is a modern "simulator" that has AI that is almost as good as falcon 3.0's. Now give ED 56 dollars for a half finished single block of the F-16.
You saw that video too? Lol.
Finally my favourite childhood game is getting some attention again 😆
It is honestly terrible, on how they just let it fly into the terrain like it wasn't even there. I get AI is not the easiest thing to do, but this is also an air combat game.
@@Raiders1917 I presume you know that AI aircraft can be set to be Rookie, Trained, Veteran or Ace in the Mission Editor. So maybe it was a Rookie AI flying into terrain like it wasn't even there:) On the other hand I and many others have flown into terrain when chasing a bandit at low level in MP fights and getting distracted at the wrong moment. Just like some real WW2 pilots too...
@@mikekohler2279max copium
How long have we been waiting for the missile logic and sensor rewrite now to conclude? Years? Still an incomplete work in progress.
Too long... way too long...
@@PrezDCS That's what she said
Fly a helicopter, infinite notching buff 🗿
Harrier plus. Amraams + hover chaff infininotch.
You do have the Harrier plus right?
Rotor blades = nah
I play war thunder. A lot, in fact. RB and sim modes. I don’t play DCS, outside a session or two of learning the basics with a friend. Despite that, I’m always disappointed when I look into how things are going with the game and see that the devs are ignoring or propagating issues. I liked the idea that there was this expensive and difficult to learn but extremely good sim game with a supportive dev team in my favorite niche genre. Sad to see the dev problem extends to y’all’s community too. Stay strong.
Can't wait for ED to learn what range gating is and how it works with missile seeker technology! Blew my mind hearing about how it works!
@@Whiskey11Gaming I remember when they first added a range gate to the AIM-120, it made notching even better because the range gate was either so small/improperly modeled that it failed to reacquire the target if it was notched and the target exited the notch
They will probably write a white paper about it first as if it some miracular technology and not something that almost occurs naturally in the engineering process if you take the doppler-shift out of the pulse-doppler transceiver.
a simulation can also be a game because (a) things can be more than one thing and (b) it's ok for realistic software to be fun.
Sure, but there needs to be a distinction where people realize that this simulation has its limits and things are gamey for lack of proper simulation.
@PrezDCS DCS is honestly set up as more of a sandbox or a pit sim more than anything else. This isn't Falcon 4.0 (a sim that came out in the 90s) where it models an actual war.
@@PrezDCS a simulation is a simlipified approximation of something, and the level of simplification is determined by the desired accuracy, what your hardware can realistically support and the amount of time you want to spend developing it.
since most of DCS has its roots in software thats 25 years old, this shallow level is to be expected.
this is no reason to leave it like that, but its clearly visible that ED are slowly but steadily improving on it.
we, as a community, should focus on pushing the need for this rework a bit harder, a discussion on their discord usually gets at
some acknowledgement. (keeping to the rules that is)
@@broko336lmao no a simulation is not A simulation is the re-creation of a real world process in a controlled environment. It involves creating laws and models to represent the world, and then running those models to see what happens. A Simulation can only be accurate as you wish it to be.
I really don’t like that DCS doesn’t have proper Radar cross section simulations. I’m paying up to $60 for a plane that has the exact same Radar cross section from any angle you look at it with.
VTOL VR does this far better meaning that Angle of attack actually changes how likely you are to be detected.
Ex. You are less likely to be detected from head on than from the side.
I’m very glad you’ve made this video, it’s an element we’ve been trying to address for a long time. As egregious as the barrel roll, they’re essentially the same thing. Use of yaw mostly and/or minor, frequent pitch changes below the missile is seen done by almost all of the ‘top’ teams out there and it’s gross. If you’re not using your rudder pedals, your survival chances decrease significantly. But it’s meta for now and the fight must go on.
the rudder is not the key to notching. anyone who’s good at it can notch without the rudder, not using the rudder does not make it harder at all or decrease your ability to notch. anyone who can do it already should have 0 issue without ruddering
10:13
What I learnt on ED forum if you complain and report issues they are just banning you...
That's true lol
That’s a garuntee
I posted an image from the textbook the radar dev was reading and got banned by them clearly because they got tired of me its a real thing. They claimed I broke ITAR rules rofl.
Found your vid yesterday and just tried the notch thing 10 times in the hornet and it worked every time, didnt get hit a single time. Never thought in my 11 years of playing DCS that it was like this… it does make it feel alot more like a game. The more you scratch on the dcs surface, the more it takes away the fun
I love the people that think they're the king of notching but can barely stay connected to a server due to ping and packet loss.
Lmao absolutely. Luckily DCS doesn't have too much issue with lag at least below 250 ping, but there are certainly still millions of issues with the netcode.
Go to growling server, bunch of f looswes with 300+ ping calling others skill issue when they lag every single second when nothing or literally starts teleporting when missile is fired at them, im also more then sure 80% of those guys are using lag switch in dcs that is present in dcs since last few years... Sad af.
This is a phenominal video in terms of getting straight to the point, and accurately explaining the skill of notching. Great job!
Thank you! I really tried to make sure this video was as clear and accurate as possible. Cut out all the crap people usually do.
@@PrezDCS well you definetly achieved that goal!
Let's just all grow the falcon Bms community and Dev team!
Perfect breakdown of the DCS notch. I too hope that it becomes more dynamic. Though it is important to note that your chaff breakdown only applies to multiplayer.
In singleplayer, the chaff entity is spawned with properties like radar reflectivity. This allows you to evade missiles by just going cold and then dumping chaff with a turn.
Not to LARP, I agree its a game, but apparently this is the most common usage of chaff/jaff IRL
I found it astonishing that in the DCS Flaming Cliffs manual, this is described as THE way to evade fox 3s, but does not work at all in multiplayer. Maybe left in the manual from a DCS predecessor who knows.
Getting flashbacks of ralfidude and IASGATG's DCS missile modeling breakdown from 5 years ago 😁
fyi at 8:35 the cmm_k0 of 0.1 is = to 1%
so a cmm of 1 means there is a 10% chance to defeat a missle with countermeasures
Good to know. I haven't seen anything up to a one so I assumed it was more like an out of 100% thing rather than out of 10%
@@PrezDCS the aim9b has a 2 i think
@@mothership-lr6ss I'd have to go look, but I believe it.
These same issues have been around since the beginning. Does anyone remember Ironhand’s old tutorial showing how you could use the Russia Beryoza to precisely time an orthogonal roll around an AIM-120? That was from the Lock On days. Pre-Flaming Cliffs.
An alarming amount of the code is still from those days it seems.
@@nighthawk2174 more than ED lets on. Would t surprise me if there’s a sizable amount of code from Flanker 2.0 or earlier.
Don’t get me wrong, DCS is very flawed but it’s a sound product. There’s a lot of capability there for those who want to use it. But the fundamental mechanics are still not the best. If the AI in DCS worked better with large operations, small details like notching wouldn’t be as bad. Perfect notching isn’t going to save you in a large scale air war where you’re getting attacked by multiple aggressors mixed in with long, medium, and short rage air defense.
Some of this simulation is on the level of CMANO, and thats meant to simulate armygroup scale operations and doesnt even have a graphical interface.
Yup, completely agree it’s just a video game. An expensive video game at that.
EA wishes for this level of macrotransactions for its games
I love when people in the dcs community get mad when you call it a video game. It’s 100 percent a video game lmao. Made for us losers who don’t have the balls to serve in real life. That’s like calling a Sunday larp a real battle.
@@bustanutist🧢 I served
Yes like any "free to play" games
@@manuelpiston Okay army reservist pipe down.
S tier explanation! Going to practice notching more now I know it has a chance of instantly defeating a missile.
These kinds of commentary videos on certain topics are really nice. Great video man, learned a lot
Im an idiot and immediately assumed this meant Notch as in minecraft
I think Mike Solyom's videos are excellent at explaining how things would work in real life, and he just happens to use DCS as his visual aid. I'd expect his videos to be much more applicable to Falcon BMS.
@@wmouse yeah, like I said, very good videos for larpers. Not so much for gamers
Nicely put together *chefs kiss*
Thank you very much!
Here's how we combine both views in 335th: For Defensive Counter-Air we run low/medium risk timelines and kinematically defeat missiles. For Offensive Counter-Air we run high-risk timelines, with high-pk shots. Once we are banzai in the visual arena where you can't defeat the missile kinematically we notch, so we have less ATA and keep the hostile defensive until he runs into the ground or eats a missile. We used to have a fantastic rwr in the F-15E and it's still good but not as easy to notch as with the F-15Cs.
DCAF will be recruiting soon, so if you want to experience our top of the line training and ops seasons, check out our Forum posts and get in contact!
That's cool and all, but I think Alamo is better ;)
I'm just a casual follower of DCS, never really played it, I just like to see what's going on with it occasionally. This was very entertaining and informative. Also, you sound suspiciously like S2 Underground lol.
Lol first time I've heard that I sound like him
I flew F16s in 1942 for Air Force battalion Charlie in Vietnam and this video is 100% accurate with how I was taught.
Hiya - Thanks for putting this out there. - Has challenged me to up my knowledge and insights on this. So would be great if you could link to say 5 or 10 tacview example files, specifically using the F16 as the defender, and where you notched and defeated Fox3 missiles in the various scenarios as described in the video. Especially a couple where the missile has already gone Pitbull/ active. Will be great for personal learning from the analysis thereof --- and then to attempt to repeat and validate your assessment myself. I noticed for instance that the video at 1:07 shows the threat symbol on the F16 RWR jumping to a new position and not moving smoothly which implies it isn't perfectly accurate and is behaving more realistically than implied in the video? Also what about the situation where a bandit is firing multiple missiles at you from different directions more than 5-10degrees apart specifically to hit you with one of those
as you are busy notching the first one? Thanks
I said the symbols transition smoothly for the F-15 not the F-16, just that the F-16 wasn't as inaccurate as you are led to believe. Also, no I have no way of sharing tacviews in the way you wish. Just got and practice it on your own. I have shown you everything you need to do in the video.
@@PrezDCS Ok thanks - I might be missing it but does the video show how to KNOW where the 90degree offset is for a missile behind you? I get it that you can refer to RWR or HMCS and assess 90degrees for the notch of the bandits aircraft radar (assuming they are using a radar mode that can be picked up by the RWR), and you can hear the warning tone disappear once lock broken...but am not sure how you assess the missile's direction in order to notch its radar once it is pitbull?
@@mikekohler2279 There's no way to know where the missile is in space until it goes active. All you can do is notch the launching aircraft's radar and hope the missile fails to acquire
Some questions:
1. Why does HPRF require a wider notch filter?
2. How should the countermeasures work instead? Should they either always work or never work depending on the radar/missile used?
@@delayed_control 1. HPRF has larger notch filters b/c it has more range ambiguity than lower PRFs b/c it acquires all its info through Doppler shift(phase comparison) and therefore needs sizeable shifts in phase b/c if the phase shift required for detection is very small you end up with lots of false alarm detections from random ground clutter
2. Some radars in game already simulate realistic chaff effects like the Razbam radars where depending the parameters of the radar, the chaff blooms will create new detections that mess with the radar. This is something that should be standard. As for flares, they could most likely model IR seekers pretty accurately without too much effort and then flare rejection would just be based on sensitivity to new heat sources/FOV which then could further be used for IRCCM modeling like in the 9M where if the seeker detects a new bright hot spot(flare) it shutters like IRL to ignore the new heat source and reacquire the normal one. These would add vastly more accurate ways to employ countermeasures
"Why does HPRF require a wider notch filter?" - Not all. It depends of radar.
"How should the countermeasures work instead? Should they either always work or never work depending on the radar/missile used?" - Everything depends on scripts and MTI clutter fillter. It just probability.
@@PrezDCS "1. HPRF has larger notch filters b/c it has more range ambiguity than lower PRFs b/c it acquires all its info through Doppler shift(phase comparison) and therefore needs sizeable shifts in phase b/c if the phase shift required for detection is very small you end up with lots of false alarm detections from random ground clutter" - it depends on radar, because every radar can have another bandwith and higher or lower transmit power.
Great video. Finally, someone is saying it. Very well explained.
@@ghostskills_dcs thank you!
Great video!!!
cookie is so happy he is on the thumbnail of a youtube video that he told me to shut up when i asked him about it the other day in a voice chat
I know this is unrelated to the video but are you ever planning to make a video like "the rooks have arrived" for the soviet song "fantom"?
I did actually talk to someone about doing that recently. It's a possibility for sure. I would be interested in starting that project.
I’d love to see a similar explanation of how the AIM-7s and other SAR missiles work/don’t work properly.
I’d have to get more information on the SARH missile to make one. They definitely need work, but they’re at least an authentic experience
DCS has always been about appearances sadly. Occasionally they replace some underlying component, but there are so many pieces to replace that the number of crappy components can still ruin the few masterful pieces.
War thunder having more realistic CMs (at least flares, notching is even easier there) is crazy
Nice video, well made! Cheers.
Thank you!
Yeah, one day, something worth wild will be 100% complete.
We can only hope and dream
Would love to see a honest comparison with the BMS
We’re talking about devs that are still selling a dead, unfinished module by Razbam. Not holding my breath for a more realistic RWR.
I hadnt heard of the notch before this video. Now i feel like Keanu Reeves after learning KungFu
As someone just now starting DCS and dumping 50-something dollars into the F16, this is extremely disheartening. I always believed that DCS was one of the most (if not the most) realistic modern flight simulators on the market. It definitely seemed like it too with how much the modules cost.
Thank you for this video. It definitely has me reconsidering some things in DCS, at least until these issues are properly addressed.
It's the best simulator for learning how to operate the aircraft. So, if you really just like pushing buttons and feeling like you're in the cockpit of a real F-16 then this is the game for you. But if you're looking for a realistic combat experience then this isn't the place
I like the path that the simulation of radars and especially IR and irst's has taken in war thunder.
With the advent of hardware level raytracing, actual direct real time optical simulation modeling of radar has become a reality a few years ago. Why it hasnt become common practice yet is beyond me.
I know that ray tracing tech just wasn't possible in DCS until maybe 2 years ago. It was one of Heatblur's big complaints that they couldn't model the AWG-9 correctly b/c of the lack of ray tracing. After it was added, Razbam was promoting the use of ray tracing in their SAR modeling for the F-15E. So, it's very much possible, but it would certainly tank the performance of some people's systems as much as I would prefer it to be commonplace.
@@PrezDCS While I understand the concern, it could be mad eoptional, and would at any rate be significantly less performance intensive than graphical raytracing. You dont need to update it at 60Hz, you can get away with just a few rays per radar, rather than one per display pixel, and you can completely skip mapping the trace into display data.
Thank you for this mate. This won’t be what you want to hear but I was thinking about getting DCS, I think I’ll just watch YT videos and fly other games.
If you're put off by the gamey taste of DCS and want a modern fighter pilot sim, try Falcon BMS. It's a lot cheaper and it's stunningly good.
You could free trial modules on standalone version, in a chain, and never really pay for anything. There are free mods as well, such as the A4E which can be used on servers.
Isn't it worth carrying chaff for SAMs? You can't really notch them, can you?
@@Lochaby you can if it’s a pulse Doppler track radar
Aweosme to see. Can you also make a video explainig the state of the jammers in DCS?
I was actually going to make one a while ago, but it fell by the wayside. I might do so here soon tho since people seem to enjoy these kinds of videos.
Ok, I think it's time to learn to notch.
Jesus christ I thought the guy who was going on about War Thunder's missile modelling being better was just having a laugh? DCS uses rng for countermeasures!?
Very informative video, thanks for making it.
I remember one time on a blueflag server years ago, I was in an F16 and fired an amraam at a hornet, he instantly goes into the notch. Little did he know, I was close enough that he was also within sidewinder range so I followed up with an aim9x. The 9x hit him, but he assumed the amraam did and began raging in chat demanding to know how he could have possibly gotten hit by an aim120, and I must have used some underhanded tactic (I think he may have accused me of cheating but I forget it's been so long), before he realized he died to a sidewinder. This was a well known skilled player who will remain unnamed. That's how much people rely on notching to be 100% consistent.
Great work on this video dude! Learnt a lot about the DCS air-to-air meta. Bit of a sorry state isn't it :(
Tell me about it
Mind Blown! Thank you!!!
You're very welcome :D
Thank you!
@@stephendecatur189 you’re very welcome
Let's further muddy the waters and discuss simulator vs emulator.
ED isn't capable of modeling modern electronic systems like radar, seekers, and RWR.
Because a lot of thing are classified.
I like the mention about the questionable guidance logic. It is comically easy to outmaneuver certain missiles (namely the 120c) by simply running perpendicular to the missile, pulling max G vertical for about a second or 2, inverting, and repeating the same until the missile passes by. Hilarious to watch it fail to keep up on tacview.
i myself play War Thunder but i like and appreciate DCS has, and notching is really rather effective and simple method of defeating a PD radar but multipathing is also rather important as (at least in War Thunder ) you don't necessarily need to go cold to defeat a radar aam
, nicely done breaking it down thx
As an aspiring Jeff flyer and lover, this video will help me greatly, I think 😂
Sorry, but Total Jeff Death
Well as Heatblur F-14 enjoyer i must put way more emphasis on kinematic defeat techniques than notching :D
@Prez Does this include the Reds planes, I love flying the Mig-29, and Su-27?
Yes
A great presentation man & very well explained, but what about all the DCS Pilots out there ( incl. me ) that have never used nor even heard of Notching before?
Well, if you want to know more about the notch then watch Mike Solyom's video :) This video isn't intended to be a "Baby's first notch" kind of thing. I made it with the assumption that you would already have an understanding of what the notch is even if you didn't know how to do it properly.
Notching is when a radar targeted plane flies in a certain angle and altitude in relation to the radar beam. That way they can create a notch or a "blind spot" in order to lose the lock or disapper from radar completely.
@@VilleVaananen there’s a lot more detail to it than that. Some radars can’t be notched, and even the ones that can have the ability to ignore it in some situations like what I describe in the video
Beautiful video. Highlighting the fact that this game mechanic is incredibly easy to pull off which basically removes the skill required to kinematically defeat a missile, then locate, and re-engage the enemy faster.
Its a shame to see how one small issue is making such a big change in the games gameplay which could probably be fixed quite simply.
Would love if you would call out some of the other issues with dcs as well that doesn't really get highlighted or may be unknown to other players:
-vr spotting being incredible
-how the tpod over preforms on may modules
-how broken jammers are code wise
-and how bad ground AI such as sams truly are.
A video such as this highlights these issues well and is better than an explanation from someones mouth.
I was in the process of making a video covering jamming a few months ago, but it fell by the wayside. I might do it now tho. Also, I don't have VR to do the spotting one, or enough references for the tpod performance. I know about ground AI tho especially for SAMs. I've actually been writing my own code for guidance logic of the older soviet SAM systems on my free time with the hopes of modding DCS with it.
@@PrezDCS yeah I think we just need a little more exposure to the issues on dcs and the jammer would be another one.
And I would love to explain the issues with the tpod but they are not as much of a problem compared to the things that affect pvp.
can you notch with a helo as well?
If you're just hovering or actually in the notch yeah, but ED have admitted that they added some extra values to make helicopters more survivable in multiplayer lol
Actually if you spin (roll with a little pitch) towards missiles in DCS they will miss 4/5 of the time. It's hilariously stupid because proximity fuses don't work in multiplayer.
Yeah, but that's a netcode issue usually, not really supposed to happen. Just a symptom of the complexity of net syncing in the game. That's actually just exploiting the game lol
@@PrezDCS it only affects the client planes, the host plane is actually at a major disadvantage as the spin trick won't work. Also, I wouldn't call it just a netcode issue. I'm compiling footage of the phenomenon and the way missiles work plus how planes in DCS "look" in the world (only the pilot models aspect matters this is why ground units always headshot) combine for a deadly stupid combo. In BMS this just doesn't happen
@@andrewa837 Oh I know it only matters about where the pilot is. That's how the fusing works. Fusing is technically modeled in multiplayer but because it's based off the pilot it never actually accurately fuses lol
@@andrewa837 wait what the game only cares about pilot position, it doesn't take account of the whole plane¿?????¿¿¿ Dafuq
@@PrezDCS this is not correct the Fuze explodes from the Plane model if you test it in detail you will also notice this
The ground units aiming at the head is also no longer the case.(for well over a year)
test this in detail and you will find exactly that, place your aircraft on a Field next to a unit of your choice, it will shoot at the centre of the aircraft and so on.
A realistic assessment 👏
I see a lot of complaints about chaff and flare being RNG but I’ve never seen anybody offer a better solution.
There is no absolute guarantee that chaff and flare works in every IRL situation, so isn’t the employment/deployment of C&F IRL essentially slightly RNG?
So what needs to be changed? Better tolerances in the programming? Better odds in the slot machine? lol.
Genuinely curious
If you've flown Razbam's F-15E and Mirage 2000, or Heatblur's F-4 and F-14, they have actually modeled the effects of chaff on radars extremely well in that they actually cause false alarm detections on the radar within certain parameters and radar settings. This is not the case for ED modules and certainly not the missiles. As for IR, one just needs to look at War Thunder (haha yes le funny inaccurate game). They have an infinitely better IR model than DCS does and DCS has existed for FAR longer and is supposed to be actually be a simulator.
I wonder if TFS has better notching or not
(Probably not but im just curious)
Does that mean MPRF can be chaff like non-pd radar?
MPRF should be more susceptible to chaff.
DCS is a video game earned my like immediately. Not sure if I am subbed but I will be after this comment is posted.
So all i have to do is look at my RWR and dive 90° away from the missile source and I won´t get hit? Why didn´t I hear this earlier, or am I wrong? How to defend IR Missiles like Sidewinders effectivly?
Yeah pretty much. You still need a little finesse to do it well, and you have to hit the parameters as I've stated in this video. And to defend IR missiles I stated in the video that all you need to do is spam flares cuz it's just a dice roll everytime you pop one
That cookie guy is on to something
I think he's RETARDED
Please post some GS hops in your Charlie Eagle. I fly the Viper exclusively, and am genuinely interested in the pvp experience with that aircraft. Frankly, it's hard to wrap my head around not having L16. Thanks in advance and thanks for this vid too! 🤝🏾
Will do. I fly it every now and then on GS, but without link16 it's really hard to make decisions relying on the slow update rate of the AWACS giving you piecemeal information
@@PrezDCS next video you can cover how irl datalink isn’t the all seeing eye as done in DCS 😅😂
Digital Combat Simulator sounds better than Digital Combat Game lol
So true
How is it a game? It simulates the actual flight ,model and systems of the aircraft. Does it need work on things like notching absolutely but that doesnt make it a game
@montrose699 you can call it whatever you want. Since you can play it at home on an ordinary PC with a mouse and keyboard, it only simulates a few aspects not all aspects. Goat Simulator is named as a simulator but no one actually knows what a goat goes through on a daily basis.
@@heremyjogan so the fact that some militaries use it to train aircraft startup and shutdown procedures as well as system and weapons setup and deployment doesn't matter???? I don't see one startup video or weapon use video or any real instructional video for War Thunder. If you know of any please share I am honestly interested
@@montrose699 It's a game. Simulators are ultimately games.
Although it provides fire res and better absorption, it really doesn't make that big of a different compared to a regular gapple.
Notch is just not that op imo
@@myr_wlk698 wtf is a gapple?
@@PrezDCS it was a joke, minecraft golden apple.
Compared to notch apple.
@@myr_wlk698 Oh lol, I know what that is. Just felt so out of context I didn't realize.
As long Chizh seat in his place at ED, there are no chanches to see qby improvement, SATAL players should mock him during streams and meme notch or AoA everything to show how a disgrace is missile notching in dcs, same for flaring everything that is launched from the frontal emisphere
Guns, guns it is then...
I understand that perpendicular flight in ground background defeats doppler shift gating target discriminators, but if its so effective, why hasnt distance gating as a secondary discriminator not become more widespread earlier? As early as the sixties ranging was commonly calculated from phase interfefence of the reflected wave in pulsed wave radars, so it should only require signal processing electronics, no new antenna by the time radar guided missiles became common in air combat.
I dont want to be that guy, but I have to....
MSFS is a game. DCS...as a war fighting simulator...is also a game. DCS as a training aid for ground handling and flight characteristics is second to none and therefore should qualify as a decent flight simulator alone. When Boeing tells you that you need to undo a specific build of the Hornet because it was "too close" to actual flight dynamics, you're a legit flight simulator. The thing that kills me is when ED selectively adds unrealistic things to their aircraft, but wont listen to customers when it comes to adding weapons to aircraft. For example: the F-18 Blk 20 never carried AIM9X, but here we are...yet we ask for the APKWS, its been flown on that block before, and its a plug and play missile, but nope...not doing that.
Yes, DCS is a great "cockpit" simulator. It does flight dynamics really well. But the combat portion of the title leaves a lot to be desired. That's kind of the big issue here.
Also speaking of dice roll, is this roll say 0.1 no matter the distance, aspect, altitude, etc? If so that's extremely primitive.
@@andrewa837 if I’m not mistaken, yes
It's a bit funny that a game like VTOL VR can model dynamic RCS based on angle and RWR as non-perfect, but THE modern combat flight sim currently in the market doesn't
That's what I like about guns...
@4:39 you have presented a list which proves more problems than good aspects of the MPRF, so it's not as you say, "impossible" to notch and actually I suppose that the tiny little radar the AIM-120 has compared to that of a fighter, will actually be easier to notch at low altitudes where both the doppler is dead because the target has the same closure rate as the ground and the pulse, because there is enough clutter to saturate the signal and still give it a good chance to have the missile loose lock on the real target, especially when chaff is also dropped. So no..., from that perspective, I totally disagree that MPRF is some sort of alien tech which defies the laws of physics and any radar's limitations which are still there. MPRF may give less lock losses, but those are still there due to the told reasons.
"EXTREMELY EASY TO DEFEAT"! Noooo..! Heheh, not that easy as you like to exaggerate it! Just try doing another video showing all of us how you "defeat" the AIM-120 so "extremely easily" 10 repeated times by having a single AIM-120 fired at you in every try and notch it in the same manner, so then we would believe you for it! I don't think anyone out there has ever put more hours in testing exactly this issue more than I had and I wish to meet that one who did so! Exactly what you say is only applying to R-27s. Those are extremely easy to notch. I agree with you only there! Tested!
About the RWR, the FC3's F-15C is a joke of arcade behaving flight controls and indestructible structure at any G-load, made mostly for kid pilots to win with, despite overperforming at turn rates at high AoAs as well, it also has that 100% accurate RWR. I would actually vote to either correct the FC3 F-15C or be banned on serious servers, cause it's very arcadish all in all simulation should not belong to DCS!
Is this still the case after the update or this is the hard fix to all game issues
@@afroamasiaca should still be the case. This isn’t a problem they could have fixed between the time I uploaded this and the time the update came out.
4:40 This sentences are not 100% true statements. Probability of occurrence notching affect have wavefaze and MTI clutter fillter. Every radar have another withband, power and software of radar. The changeable PRF can help with decluttering of notching targets, but PRF not always have affact on notch.
I have text on screen to state that MPRF can still be notched.
@@PrezDCS Ok.
Good stuff, hopefully people take a lot away from it.
That's my hope as well. I think everyone in the community, regardless of their leaning towards PvP multiplayer, should understand this and open their eyes to how this game really works.
Wait, did you say the DCS AMRAAM *only* has HPRF and never goes to MPRF? Can you explain this further? How do you know? I'm genuinely curious.
I’d have to go digging on the forums for the physical evidence, but AFAIK ED has never mentioned that the missile has an MPRF mode. They don’t know how to properly model MPRF regardless. This was evidenced by a long discussion over the F-16’s radar a few years ago involving the SME Klarsnow
Okay, if you read the thread on the forums "AIM-120 still can not chase simple Split S manuever." You will see where I get what I am talking about. This is an infamous thread where Maestro, the ED missile modeler, argues with Klarsnow (an IRL Growler EWO) about how MPRF works. ED has modeled the seeker to be "MPRF" in that it has a medium PRF (10Khz) but the actual functionality of the missile is operating as HPRF. It's only MPRF in name.
@@PrezDCS thank you, I'll take a look
bahahha
You are my HERO.
It is notch and Die in Falcon BMS.
i am super sad to hear this, because i wanted a realistic simulation which is only 1% or so different from real life
VTOL VR has better Radar, EW, Notching, and Countermeasures simulation than DCS will ever have with ED behind the wheel.
The AMRAAM is actually modelled as being MPRF only, with HPRF active (Husky) not being modelled. The issue is: MPRF doesn't behave like MPRF should. The F-15E's radar (if you can get it to work these days, shoutouts to Budgie), is probably the only radar in DCS that really makes MPRF work properly, being incredibly difficult to notch thanks to range binning.
Is it possible to notch still? Yes, but it's so difficult and so barely situationally possible that you're still probably dead if you were to try to notch it. Or you would be if the missiles you were shooting weren't victim to the same issue. This is why Sparrow F-15E is so strong. You aren't relying on some AMRAAM seeker to work. All you need to do is maintain lock with an accurately simulated MPRF-capable radar. Bish bash bosh.
On the AMRAAM, HPRF active would be switched to first for high closure rate targets. It'd then transition to MPRF active for the remainder of the flight. The missile can go straight to MPRF active if the closure rate isn't high enough to warrant using HPRF. In DCS, only MPRF active works, but you're right that it might as well be HPRF due to how notch prone it is.
@@CaptPickguard it’s not MPRF. It’s HPRF but they call it MPRF because, as you said, they do not model it correctly at all. ED, AFAIK, has never stated it to be the case that their missile is modeled with MPRF. Also, the F-15E/Sparrow combo is the worst in the game. The F-15E barely works with sparrows as the flood mode is not available leading to failures to track against maneuvering target AND the AIM-7 CANNOT be guided in MPRF. ONLY HPRF.
@@PrezDCS My key point is that it's modelled as if it were MPRF but it behaves like HPRF. The symbology for HPRF active (Husky) is entirely absent.
They need to work on how the AMRAAM switches between these modes and how these modes behave (and well, make sure both exist in the game in the first place).
@@CaptPickguard Yes, okay I agree with you there. They have modeled the AIM-120 as "MPRF" but it's functionally HPRF. That's closer to the reality. You're still wrong about the F-15E tho
@@PrezDCS Yep my note about the Sparrows comes from hazy memory of their specifics in the F-15E. The real issue is no matter how great your plane's radar is simulated, your missile is going to go active and use ED's current shoddy implementation.
If MPRF on the AMRAAM behaved in the same manner as MPRF does on the Strike Eagle, it'd be lethal.
@@CaptPickguard Yeah, I agree, and that's my point when I say in the video it should have MPRF cuz it would be incredibly hard to defeat like MPRF on the APG-70
As a DCS player i have no idea why anyone else would get offended. Never have I ever considered it anything but a video game and I have yet to find someone else who was confusing themselves.
You should interact with the community more then. There's lots of people that take this game way more seriously than they should and will point out this game as analogic for IRL.